blog logo image

Posts Tagged ‘Center for Global Development’

CGD Defends Untied Aid

Thursday, August 12th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

On Monday, MFAN member Sarah Jane Staats – director of policy outreach at the Center for Global Development – outlined three reasons why Senator Jim Webb’s (D-VA) calls for putting a stop to Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) funding to non-U.S. companies in Africa will not solve any of our economic or development problems.  Staats argues:

1. It’s bad development. Restricting overseas development contracts to domestic bidders – so-called “tied aid” – buys political support at home, but often costs more and is less effective.

2. Taxpayers pay more, but get less…Requiring the MCC to use only U.S. companies in regions where they could be more expensive, less effective, or may not exist, unduly constrains our aid dollars and ends up costing American taxpayers more money.

3. The MCC is not ExIm or OPIC. The U.S. Export-Import Bank (ExIm) and theOverseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) are designed specifically to help U.S. businesses invest overseas.

Staats reminds us that tying development assistance to U.S. companies is not only bad development, but it goes against the principle of ownership of aid that has popped up in the Obama Administration’s initiatives like Feed the Future and the Global Health Initiative.  Read the full piece here.

MFAN Member Staats on Vacancies at USAID

Tuesday, August 10th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

Last week, MFAN Member Sarah Jane Staats, director of policy outreach at the Center for Global Development, published an op-ed  in the Global Post lamenting on the vacant leadership positions at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).  Staats argued that these top positions need to be filled in order for the agency to successfully implement internal reforms and move the overall foreign assistance reform agenda forward.  Staats wrote:

“To date, only one official — USAID Administrator Raj Shah — has been confirmed. While Shah has skilled and capable leaders in his front office and throughout the agency, several of whom have been doing yeoman’s work in acting positions, it is unconscionable that all remaining management seats remain unfilled 18 months into this administration. Shah cannot captain the USAID ship without a crew.”

“USAID cannot be the premier development agency everyone envisions without appointed and confirmed leaders at the helm of its regional and functional bureaus. Nor can it elevate development across the U.S. government — as Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and even Secretary of Defense Robert Gates have called for — without a full cadre of assistant administrators to inform major development policy reviews taking place right now and congressional efforts to rewrite foreign assistance legislation.”

Josh Rogin later reported on The Cable that President Obama intends to nominate Nancy Lindborg — current President of Mercy Corps and MFAN Principal — to be Assistant Administrator for USAID’s Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Affairs Bureau, as well as nominate Donald K. Steinberg to be Deputy Administrator of USAID.  The other names working their way through the nomination process are: Mark Feierstein to be Assistant Administrator of Latin America and Nisha Desai Biswal to be Assistant Administrator of Asia; both were approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week.  The Obama Administration is now batting 5 out of 12 for Senate-confirmed leadership positions at USAID.

MFAN Partner Analyzes Pakistan Aid

Wednesday, July 21st, 2010
Bookmark and Share

CGDOn Monday, MFAN Partner the Center for Global Development (CGD) posted a piece on what it will take to change the attitudes of the Pakistani people with respect to the U.S. commitment to long-term development in the country.  The post was co-written by CGD President Nancy Birdsall, Molly Kinder, and Wren Elhai and originally appeared on Foreign Policy’s AfPak Channel blog.  In order to “build common ground” they argue Secretary Clinton should be explicit in stating the U.S. commitment over the long-term and provide a clear vision — supported with specific examples — of what exactly that long-term commitment will look like.  The U.S. should also be transparent and willing to partner with the Pakistani government to create a common set of indicators to measure progress.  The piece goes on to list four points that will help clarify the mission for the U.S. and for the Pakistani people, many of which are based on reform principles such as transparency and partnership.  See excerpts below:

“And the U.S. has a history of abandoning aid commitments to Pakistan when incoming governments violated nuclear norms, or when a bulwark against communism didn’t seem to matter as much. As understandable as some of these decisions were at the time, they seem to make it clear that U.S. development aid was driven as much or more by diplomatic imperatives as by a long-run development vision for the Pakistani people.”

“At a joint news conference with Clinton today, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi declared, “The opinion about the United States in Pakistan will change when the people of Pakistan see how, through this partnership, their lives have changed.” But without articulating a vision that resonates with the Pakistani people of what that hoped-for change is coupled with a concrete plan for evaluating progress — even the announcement of large aid projects is likely to be seen through the lens of the unsteady deal-making that has characterized the U.S.’s relationship with Pakistan in the past. When launching into space, what matters is not just how big and expensive your rocket is. You also need to know what planet you are aiming for.”

CGD recognizes that the U.S. must take a new approach in delivering aid to Pakistan that is based on transparency and partnership.  What will it take to put these reforms into action?  Read about what MFAN believes is needed for reform here.

CQ Article Quotes MFAN Co-Chairs, Highlights Hill Aid Reform Leadership

Monday, July 19th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

Howard Bermanart.kerry.lugar.giA CQ article (full text below) published today, which quotes MFAN Co-Chairs David Beckmann and George Ingram, gives a rundown of how the leadership of Congressional leaders Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA) and Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Dick Lugar (R-IN) has helped drive unprecedented progress on foreign assistance reform.  The missing ingredient that could push reform efforts over the top, according to the article?  Presidential leadership.

To join MFAN’s effort to urge President Obama to show leadership on foreign assistance reform and strengthen the U.S. commitment to development, please sign our Open Letter to the President, which has already been endorsed by more than 70 organizations and prominent individuals.

CQ WEEKLY – IN FOCUS
July 19, 2010

Backers Say Time Is Ripe For Foreign Aid Overhaul

By Emily Cadei, CQ Staff

The earthquake that slammed Haiti in January also rocked the U.S. Agency for International Development and its brand-new administrator, Rajiv Shah, who were promptly assigned to head up the civilian U.S. response to the disaster. The experience of the next several months afterward was eye-opening and “helped me shape my agenda for reform for the agency writ large,” Shah said in a speech last month.

(more…)

Former USAID Administrator Andrew Natsios calls Bureaucracy an Obstacle to Development Practices

Wednesday, July 7th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

“Relieving the tension between the counter-bureaucracy and development practice would require implementing new measurement systems, conducting more research on overregulation and its effects, reducing the layers of oversight and regulation, and aligning programmatic goals with organizational incentives.”

According to Andrew Natsios, visiting fellow at the Center for Global Development and former Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) from 2001 to 2006, obstructive layers of bureaucracy pose the largest challenge to delivering effective foreign assistance for agencies such as USAID. In his essay, “The Clash of the Counter-bureaucracy and Development,” Natsios relates how bureaucratic obstacles hinder USAID development practices and even damage U.S. national security objectives. Follow the link below to read the full paper:

Clash of Counter-bureaucracy and Development – Natsios

Read another piece authored by Andrew Natsios and MFAN Principals J. Brian Atwood and M. Peter McPherson regarding the problems with the U.S. foreign assistance system titled “Arrested Development Making Foreign Aid a More Effective Tool” (Foreign Affairs, Nov/Dec 2008).